-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
> Thinking about this a little more, I guess it does not hurt to build some
> kind of voting system into the clients. But I think it's more useful for
> straw polls. For example a bug fix 100% of people should agree on. A
> protocol optimization p
On 10 June 2013 06:09, John Dillon wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> It has been suggested that we leave the decision of what the blocksize to
> be
> entirely up to miners. However this leaves a parameter that affects every
> Bitcoin participant in the control of a sm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:25:05PM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote:
>> to sign votes. Not only that, but it would require them to reveal their
>> public key, which while isn't technically so terrible, l
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 01:25:05PM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote:
> to sign votes. Not only that, but it would require them to reveal their
> public key, which while isn't technically so terrible, large amounts of
> money intended to be kept in storage for 10+ years will prefer to avoid
> any exposure
One major problem I see with this, no matter how well-thought-out it is,
it's unlikely that those with money will participate. Those with the
most stake, likely have their private keys behind super-secure
accessibility barriers, and are not likely to go through the effort just
to sign votes. Not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John,
What you are recommending is a drastic change that the conservative
bitcoin developers probably wouldn't get behind (but let's see). However
proof-of-stake voting on protocol soft-forks has vast implications even
beyond the block size limit. Wi
On 10 June 2013 10:35, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
> wrote:
> > However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was one CPU one vote.
>
> This is perhaps the largest misconception that keeps being repeated.
> Bitcoin is not a democracy; it is a zero-trust s
On 10 June 2013 10:26, John Dillon wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
> wrote:
> > -1
> >
> > Firstly I appreciate the ingenious thought that went into this post.
> >
> > However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was on
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
wrote:
> However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was one CPU one vote.
This is perhaps the largest misconception that keeps being repeated.
Bitcoin is not a democracy; it is a zero-trust system. The rules are
set in stone, and every full node ve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Melvin Carvalho
wrote:
> -1
>
> Firstly I appreciate the ingenious thought that went into this post.
>
> However, Bitcoin's fundamental philosophy was one CPU one vote.
Indeed it was. Which is why as GPU's came onto
On 10 June 2013 06:09, John Dillon wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> It has been suggested that we leave the decision of what the blocksize to
> be
> entirely up to miners. However this leaves a parameter that affects every
> Bitcoin participant in the control of a sm
Reserving my judgement until I've though about it more (design by committee
scares me, and this voting sounds expensive), I think the SPV-verifiable
moving median can be done by binning the space of block size limits, and
for each node in the UTXO tree, a value for each bin is stored which is the
s
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:09:26AM +, John Dillon wrote:
My general comments on the idea are that while it's hard to say if a
vote by proof-of-stake is really representative, it's likely the closest
thing we'll ever get to a fair vote. Proof-of-stake is certainely better
than just letting mine
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Edmund Broadley wrote:
> I really like this idea. I also like that users with no clue will leave
> their vote to the default chosen by the software developers, which hopefully
> will be 1MB. I like how coin age is fa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
It has been suggested that we leave the decision of what the blocksize to be
entirely up to miners. However this leaves a parameter that affects every
Bitcoin participant in the control of a small minority. Of course we can not
force miners to increa
15 matches
Mail list logo
